Why do some posters find it necessary to repeat an entire post when replying, especially with only two words?

Because they haven't found the "add reply" button yet

To come back to the point, and to set aside the "seeing the past through pink tinted glasses" usual rant, when in the 70's did we last see 13 riders all within 38 seconds at the end of a Grand Prix ? ( OK, perhaps outside of a 250 or 350cc scratch at Silverstone....)

...and before I get shot down in flames ; a/ I didn't watch the GP ( couldn't be bothered, ...) and b/ the good old days sure were better days

Its not the racing its the bikes Philippe, even if we had 8 bikes crossing the finish line within a 1000 of a sec it would still be crap to many on here, coz its not two strokes, those days are gone forever & in the days of Mick Doohan (when he had no real competition) he cleared off & won by 10-20 secs or more in a field of 25+ two strokes.

I disagree with you on that score , my learned friend , there could always be a mix of the 2 ( worked OK in the past ) , but I think there are to many regulations , to much hi-tech , to many rider ' aids ' , there ought to be a limit on costs , it was always the privateers who provided the bulk of the grid , and much of the scrapping , throughout the field , OK , a distance behind the ' works ' stars , I would sooner see a full grid ( at the 1983 British GP there were 59 entries - with 50 posting qualifying times ) than 16 starting , and all finishing in point scoring positions , how boring is that ??

I disagree with you on that score , my learned friend , there could always be a mix of the 2 ( worked OK in the past ) , but I think there are to many regulations , to much hi-tech , to many rider ' aids ' , there ought to be a limit on costs , it was always the privateers who provided the bulk of the grid , and much of the scrapping , throughout the field , OK , a distance behind the ' works ' stars , I would sooner see a full grid ( at the 1983 British GP there were 59 entries - with 50 posting qualifying times ) than 16 starting , and all finishing in point scoring positions , how boring is that ??

Well I shall be going to the Brit GP,but only because my son purchased a three day ticket for me as a pressy,and the only race I will be interested in will be the 125cc 2 STROKE RACE.........as far as I am concerned the Moto 2 is Just a Honda benefit affair,and as for the so called motogp top boys well thats another farce,so next year they will up the capacity ....so what !!!.they might as well run standard road bikes,basically moto2 and motogp are 4 stroke proddy racers,with a shitload of hype,and onboard electronics.....Had my rant,over to you now................

I disagree with you on that score , my learned friend , there could always be a mix of the 2 ( worked OK in the past ) , but I think there are to many regulations , to much hi-tech , to many rider ' aids ' , there ought to be a limit on costs , it was always the privateers who provided the bulk of the grid , and much of the scrapping , throughout the field , OK , a distance behind the ' works ' stars , I would sooner see a full grid ( at the 1983 British GP there were 59 entries - with 50 posting qualifying times ) than 16 starting , and all finishing in point scoring positions , how boring is that ??

I thought you were refering to Moto2, I agree that MotoGP is crap, they (Dorna) wanted it (the show) to be like F1, with franchises for the chosen few, if I recall only ever a max of 22 bikes? & now we have lost the only two privateer teams Roberts & the Peter Clifford team forget their name, & no Kawasaki & only one Suzuki & never any wild card entries coz the few want the "prize" money paid out kept to the few.Also as the grid is so thin only the top 10 should get points IMHO, it does my head in that their are FOUR Spanish races no wonder that their are so many Spanish riders coming through, & why do only MotoGP go to Laguna Seca? the other classes are part of the show to so all of em or none!!Their got that off my chest, MotoGP is B******s.

Oooo! no disagree about them being proddy racers Pete, the Moto2 bikes are purpose built race bikes fitted with sadly a tuned 600 Honda engine, it does make the class exciting though as there were 9? different winners last year, & MotoGP nothing comes from a road bike, but they are still boring.

The circuits especially those desert type don't help, no atmosphere. I don't mind if they are two strokes or otherwise. I find it embarrassing that there are so few on the grid for MotoGP class. I was only saying yesterday evening to my daughters boyfriend how they had 50,125,250,350,500cc and sidecars years ago with some riders competing in two or more classes It's sad that our home international events lack the top guys (as mentioned elswhere) It was great to see Hailwood, Redman, Ivy, Read etc on factory tackle at Cadwell etc. Even latter days with Saarrinen and then the Transatlantic series Roberts etc gave us a chance to see the greats, outside a GP that is, were a better bet than todays offerings.Ah well ....... Sadly a sign of the times. We can only rejoice in what we took for granted at the time was in fact great era's for the sport with regard to seeing and hearing the best bikes and riders in the world. We didn't realise what was in store

For me motogp prior to the introduction of the 800s was developing in to one of the greatest shows on earth with a mix of 3s, 4s and 5s and a healthy grid of at least 24 (and sometimes more) bikes. But the dim wits who run the show were completely incapable of planning ahead and almost at the stroke of a pen managed to eliminate Aprilia, KTM, BMW, Kawasaki and others and have never made any attempt to make sure that talented non spanish and italian riders were encouaged to participate in the series. And just for good measure they managed to make the racing substantially more dangerous and re-introduced the violent 'highside'.

Please stop always trying to copy Formula 1 and run a proper competetive elite world series you absolutely stupid incompetent di**h**ds who pretand to run motogp. You are a an absolute disgrace!!

One simple answer could be the Honda C90 GP, its cheap, easy to get a full grid and most come with sponsor logo's and a free drink with every pizze delux. Oh and i didnt waste a whole page on copying someone else's comment.

Well I might as well put in my sixpence worth. The person sitting there watching it on the box is not interested in the technical side of the sport he just wants to watch a great race and be put on the edge of his seat. I really like world superbikes and supersport as there are good grids and usually great racing. Moto 2 has at least brought some of this back and while I would like to see it opened up to all maufacturers I think it has brought the word sport back to Grand Prix racing. To get the grids for MotoGP they will have to deal with the costs and allow road based engines or arrange for someone to supply a bespoke engine at a realistic cost and dump the rider aids and expensive electronics. Get back to some affordable bikes that the privateer can shine on and then we can see a Grand Prix worthy of the name.

Correct me if I'm wrong (orderly queue please!) But the controlling body is not interested in appealing to us 'grey beards'.Its better if they have an audience who don't know one end of a bike from the other,just as it is in F1.Its all about TV rights and marketing.15 riders is ideal for 'em,cos it means that they can all have a point or 2.Wouldn't do for instance for Mr H to have one of his golden boys finish out of the points.I am now going into my bunker and locking the door behind me!!

Herr W, no need to hide. It would be great if sport became a sport again. Still we could hold our breath and wait to see the so called 1000cc Norton MotoGP bike beat them all. Well a little Italian factory did it a few years ago, didnt they?

Correct me if I'm wrong (orderly queue please!) But the controlling body is not interested in appealing to us 'grey beards'.Its better if they have an audience who don't know one end of a bike from the other,just as it is in F1.Its all about TV rights and marketing.15 riders is ideal for 'em,cos it means that they can all have a point or 2.Wouldn't do for instance for Mr H to have one of his golden boys finish out of the points.I am now going into my bunker and locking the door behind me!!

Correct me if I'm wrong (orderly queue please!) But the controlling body is not interested in appealing to us 'grey beards'.Its better if they have an audience who don't know one end of a bike from the other,just as it is in F1.Its all about TV rights and marketing.15 riders is ideal for 'em,cos it means that they can all have a point or 2.Wouldn't do for instance for Mr H to have one of his golden boys finish out of the points.I am now going into my bunker and locking the door behind me!!

HW

Thats true Andy, its all about TV exposure of the branding/sponsor now,the people paying to get in are of secondry importance the smaller the number of starters in the "premier" class the better as they all get some TV time.

It's quite clear we don't agree with the modern concept of our chosen sport so maybe we should get back to chatting about the antics of Sideways Sid, Minter, and those stories from ex-racers from the past and the not so past

Thanks for your pragmatic approach, wondered if we all turned into Statlers and Waldorfs

Thanks Andy. Although we all dislike the way it is nowadays, we nevertheless sit in front of the telly when the races are on
Well, high time now to prepare a NSU Sportmax for a 'Burt Munro' style attack on Moto3 next year

Constantly hoping for things to improve I think.Speculation: just how much slower would the NSU be in a modern chassis with a top rider.I guess todays stop/start tracks would not be in its favour.Maybe Provini's Morini motor would be better!!

Constantly hoping for things to improve I think.Speculation: just how much slower would the NSU be in a modern chassis with a top rider.I guess todays stop/start tracks would not be in its favour.Maybe Provini's Morini motor would be better!!

Well, the NSU is somewhere in the region of 28 hp, the Morini probably in the 40 hp range, I think modern 250 motocrossers are close to 50hp, so you may expect a Moto3 reaching 50-55 hp....

Please stop always trying to copy Formula 1 and run a proper competetive elite world series you absolutely stupid incompetent di**h**ds who pretand to run motogp. You are a an absolute disgrace!!

These poor people (usually referred to in my late-night discourses on this extremely frustrating topic as "corrupt, blazer-wearing Spanish clowns") are rubbing their hands together at the prospect of the general populace drooling over the appearance of Rossi on the works Ducati, while shitting themselves that it may not come off, and that the Dorna-owned series itself is up for sale at the end of the year. For me, and next year I will have been going to bike racing for 50 years, I wish Rossi had never appeared, because while he has without question inveigled millions of viewers worldwide to watch the sport, for these people he is all that the sport represents, and nothing and nobody else, including the sport's history, matters or has any value. So Dorna have assumed that when he goes, all will be lost, so the game's on the market. Bunch of pillaging parasites. Sooner they, and he, piss off, the sooner we can get back to something resembling reality....

I had never heard of Dorna until I had logged on here. I'm still not sure who they are. And WTF are the FIM for? And how did Dorna wrest control anyway?

Hi Russ, I think it all started when Kenny Roberts and other big shots tried to start a 'pirate' series in the early eighties and the incompetence of the FIM became apparent for those who hadn't detected it before . Dorna is a product of Mr Ecclestone, isn't it ?

I've always thought that the GP world championship was a series that only three or four bike/riders could win, at best. Most motor racing series are the same.

Is it really more exciting to have 20 also-rans going round and round or is that just burning up dollars? Is that what the paying punters come to see?

If the current MotoGP series is a bad as some here say, at what time in the past did the top level of racing pass muster as far as numbers, competitiveness, potential winners etc? Is it true that the GP500 races of the early 90's were the best ever (horrendous injury toll notwithstanding)?

I ask this because I'm interested in knowing what MotoGP is being compared with.

I've always thought that the GP world championship was a series that only three or four bike/riders could win, at best. Most motor racing series are the same.

Is it really more exciting to have 20 also-rans going round and round or is that just burning up dollars? Is that what the paying punters come to see?

If the current MotoGP series is a bad as some here say, at what time in the past did the top level of racing pass muster as far as numbers, competitiveness, potential winners etc? Is it true that the GP500 races of the early 90's were the best ever (horrendous injury toll notwithstanding)?

I ask this because I'm interested in knowing what MotoGP is being compared with.

It's almost always been that way, the factory with the most pounds/Yen for development and riders fees wins.

Time to go back to 500cc, 2 stroke and 4 stroke, anything goes no limit on number of cylinders or gears (no blowers), still won't be any closer racing but the sounds should be good. And as always with bikes unlike the F1 cars, they can overtake!

spot on, long gone is the day when a van pulls up with bike and sleeping bag in it and the rider beats most of the factory bikes then goes home to his day job. well said rc.

I've seen Hailwood turn up at Brands in a Dormobile van and take a Honda 6 out the back. There might have been another Honda in the back too, but there wasn't a shedload of parts, hangers on or mechanics. I think Mike got changed into his leathers in the bogs.

Time to go back to 500cc, 2 stroke and 4 stroke, anything goes no limit on number of cylinders or gears (no blowers), still won't be any closer racing but the sounds should be good. And as always with bikes unlike the F1 cars, they can overtake!

Only the factories can afford to build bikes with any number of cylinders. WTF could build a 5 cylinder 125 or a 4 cylinder with 17 gears?

Whatever, I'll never attend another GP. Who wants to watch 3 races spread over 5 hours and cough up £50? And at Silverstone, which is probably the worse track I've ever attended.

I've always thought that the GP world championship was a series that only three or four bike/riders could win, at best. Most motor racing series are the same.

Is it really more exciting to have 20 also-rans going round and round or is that just burning up dollars? Is that what the paying punters come to see?

If the current MotoGP series is a bad as some here say, at what time in the past did the top level of racing pass muster as far as numbers, competitiveness, potential winners etc? Is it true that the GP500 races of the early 90's were the best ever (horrendous injury toll notwithstanding)?

I ask this because I'm interested in knowing what MotoGP is being compared with.

So why not have a race of just the quickest three or four blokes? If you think that's dopey it can only be because you think the size of the grid has a bearing on the extent to which the race is a spectacle ?

I'm struggling to recall a time when any GP grids were as small as at present. On the 'pass muster front': for much of the fifties and sixties we had more factory teams, more variation in bike/ engine design, yes, fuller grids and riders who, for the most part, weren't prima donnas

Whenever I watch MotoGP ( crap name ) I hear riders complaining about the setup of their bikes, usually mentioning "chatter" as the big problem I can't help but think " why do we have these bikes that are so hard to set up ?" surely it would be more productive to have simpler machines that a rider could be competitive on at every track and not need the vast amount of testing & practise required now. Hopefully affordable as well as the old days of privateer teams are long gone ( sadly )
I'm not proposing that we go back to Manxs & G50s but the engineering geniuses could come up with something, at the moment it appears innovation is all that matters and they have forgotten that it's supposed to be a spectator sport which at the moment it's failing miserably at, technology over entertainment.
Going onto F1 comparisons, how many times have we heard that they are going to make the racing closer in future but never do ? Ecclestone is perfectly happy with the status quo, they still pack the circuits and take prime time tv spots without having to provide "racing", perhaps Dorna was hoping MotoGP would go this way ?....time to wake up Dorna. When people such as myself and others found on this forum switch off the tv there's something very wrong.
I just hope they fix the problem before the sport dies.
Greg

I'm not proposing that we go back to Manxs & G50s but the engineering geniuses could come up with something,

I suppose in a way they have but in a different way, things like launch control, traction control, anti wheelie etc etc are 'standardising' the bikes and can be programmed to dial out problems, I bet the riders dont even report back half of the problems now, rather the technicians tell the riders from the datalogging what problems they are having, some of which the rider hasnt even noticed.

The days of coming in and asking for a softer spring or a smaller jet are certainly long gone.

They even have a 'limp mode' get you home function for fuel so the rider doesnt need to roll the throttle if he's worried about fuel.

Its going to become exactly the same as F1 where the tech guys decide who wins.

I've got nothing against technical advancement but when it gets to the point where it is the primary interest of the factories rather than spectator interest then something is wrong. It's a spectator sport and at present it isn't. maybe we should go back to basics i.e. simpler,cheaper bikes and more of them.....am I talking WSB ???
Greg